Council may sell slivers of Fairview

Deirdre Newman

When Tim Cromwell bought his house on Swan Drive in 1997, the

property had already crept more than 2 feet over its border into

Fairview Park.

Cromwell has invested about $3,000 worth of landscaping in his

encroachment, which includes mature trees and bougainvillea.

So he was not pleased with the prospect of losing his excess

property when the City Council on Tuesday considered options to deal

with encroachments on the park.

At the meeting, Cromwell and some of his neighbors convinced city

leaders not to take away their excess property for now. As a step

toward letting Swan Drive residents keep the encroachments for a

price, the City Council approved researching what it would take to

sell the land and to start negotiating with these residents.

There’s just one caveat.

All the residents who encroach onto Fairview Park must buy into

the plan, because otherwise there could be land-locked parcels that

would be impossible to reach or maintain.

“This is your chance to show us that you’re serious,” Mayor Gary

Monahan said. “If only half of you are interested, then this goes

away.”

The encroachments by Swan Drive homeowners west of Placentia

Avenue include block walls, wooden and chain-link fences, planters

and other landscaping. Seventeen homeowners have exceeded their

property limits, from less than a foot to more than 22 feet.

The city’s present method of dealing with encroachments is to

allow them up to 6 inches as of January 2002 and ban any

encroachments after that. If one is found, the city gives the

homeowner about 30 days to remove it. If it’s not removed within that

time, the encroachment is removed by staff, and the homeowner is

billed for the labor and equipment used to remove it, plus

administrative costs.

The council considered 18 options on Tuesday involving selling,

leasing or requiring a permit for the encroachment areas or not

permitting them at all.

Like Cromwell, many of the residents who have encroachments said

they bought their property with the extra land already in place. They

also accuse the city of neglecting the area in question for a long

time. At a Parks and Recreation Commission meeting in May 2001,

former Parks Project Manager Dave Alkema said the only purpose for

the land would be as a buffer.

Cromwell said he was confident that all the land would be bought.

“I think there’s a good chance that if a next door neighbor isn’t

buying, there will be [another] next door neighbor who will be

willing to buy it and we’ll probably all pitch in to buy that

parcel,” Cromwell said.

Some residents inveighed against the council for considering

selling the excess property.

“As a property owner, you should know where your property line

ends,” Beth Refrakes said. “You would be granting them something

others in the city don’t have and setting a dangerous precedent.”

Councilwoman Libby Cowan agreed and tried to pass two motions, to

reject all encroachments and, when that one didn’t muster support, to

allow encroachments of up to six inches. The second motion also died.

Councilman Allan Mansoor expressed several concerns about

exploring the sale of the property without knowing for sure if that

was possible. One of those apprehensions involves the county, since

it would have to give its seal of approval to the city selling or

leasing the land.

The council ultimately voted 4 to 1 in favor of looking into

selling the property, with Cowan dissenting.

Public Services Director Bill Morris is working on a citywide park

encroachment policy that will deal with the rest of the city parks.

* DEIRDRE NEWMAN covers Costa Mesa and may be reached at (949)

574-4221 or by e-mail at deirdre.newman@latimes.com.